Posted on 08/23/2019 3:26:57 PM PDT by Starman417
The late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was what we call an “originalist” when it came to interpreting the U.S. Constitution. He believed the only way to read the Constitution was in the context of the times when its provisions were written which formed the intent of those who wrote and later amended it. We could only interpret what they meant by reading what they wrote through the filter of the events of their day, not our day.
The issue of the 14th Amendment and whether it conveys birthright citizenship just from being born on American soil has resurfaced in the context of the current debate on immigration and border security. The answer can be found in looking at the times in which it was written and examining the actual words and thoughts of those who wrote it.
The 14h Amendment was written in 1868 after a bitter Civil War ended slavery. It was written to ensure the civil rights of freed slaves and to correct the injustices spawned by the 1857 Dred Scott decision which denied that blacks were entitled to citizenship under the U.S. Constitution. Surely it cannot be seriously argued that the authors of the 14th Amendment had in mind babies born to residents of Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador who managed to sneak their pregnant bodies past a U.S. Border Patrol that didn’t exist yet in violation of immigration laws that hadn’t been written yet.
Like abortion rights, which were divined from the “penumbras” and “emanations” said to be lurking somewhere in that document, supporters of birthright citizenship say, well the language is imprecise and the authors didn’t really mean to exclude the offspring of Guatemalans born in states which didn’t exist in 1868. This is a clear violation of the Scalia originalist doctrine. The Constitution is not a living document and should be read in the context of the events of 1868, not 2019.
President Trump has once again noted the absurdity of the modern interpretation of the 14th Amendment that invented the concept of birthright citizenship for illegal aliens. As reported by FoxNews:
Speaking to reporters outside the White House on Wednesday, President Trump again threatened to end what he called the "ridiculous" policy of birthright citizenship, which awards citizenship automatically to those born in the United States.Indeed it is according to Heritage Foundation senior legal fellow Hans A. von Spakovsky who argued that birthright citizenship supporters play word games to justify their position:"We're looking at that very seriously," Trump told reporters as he left the White House for Kentucky. "Birthright citizenship, where you have a baby on our land — you walk over the border, have a baby, congratulations, the baby's now a U.S. citizen. We're looking at it very, very seriously ...It’s, frankly, ridiculous."
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...
Can you direct me to where the authors of the 14th said that it would not apply to foreigners?
( I could have used this info several months ago).
...is an understatement. It needs to end now.
H-1B Indian visa holders pretty much all do this same thing. Most if not all of their marriages are prearranged so they bring their wives over here and drop a kid or 2 and never leave. I see it every day.
The Fourteenth Amendment is very clear, and it does NOT permit birthright citizenship.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.